Football blog | Nothing wrong with recruits changing their minds

High school coaches think so, most parents of recruits eventually come to that conclusion and even those doing the recruiting agree.

It has become a necessary evil, because once College A had success recruiting Quinn Quarterback as a junior, College B decided to recruit Ricky Runningback as a sophomore.

Don't do it and you're left behind. It's grossly unfair to late bloomers, because if there's no Division I scholarship offers by the time senior year starts, chances are there won't be when it ends.

That is not the subject of the day, though. Today's thesis is about the oral commitment, and why I always defend kids who back out of them, regardless of whether or not a coaching change was at the root of the decommitment.

Every year I listen to a new batch of recruits talk about how important it is for them to keep their word, how they don't want to be the guy known for taking back his commitment and choosing a different school.

There are head coaches who tell kids once they commit, the process is over.

I understand where these players and coaches are coming from. It's an honorable stance. It's also naïve.

Three high-major prospects have switched commitments recently, which seems like a lower number than most recent years.

Maine South offensive lineman Brendan Brosnan and De La Salle running back Mikale Wilbon decided against Vanderbilt when head coach James Franklin left, with Brosnan following him to Penn State and Wilbon choosing Nebraska.

Iowa State did not have a head coaching change, but the dismissals of the Cyclones' offensive coordinator and running backs coach was enough to prompt St. Rita's Tommy Mister to opt for Indiana instead.

Good for them. They still have power until signing day next week, and they should use it. Heck, if Mister for some reason changed his mind again before signing day and wanted to go back to Iowa State, good for him again.

College football is big, dare I say, a huge business. Loyalty works only as a two-way street. To paraphrase Chris Rock, man is only as loyal as his options.

Colleges offer kids early and change their minds later all the time. I don't know why some think there's a stigma surrounding kids who do the same.

Once recruits sign letters of intent next week, all their power is gone.

Save for illegal activity, they have no power over anything that might happen, whether it turns out they were lied to about what position they will play, about how other guys might be used, about the job security of the coaching staff, the offense or defense they will run, their slot on the depth chart, etc.

College coaches do this for a living. They know what to say, how to say it and how to handle each situation differently depending on the people involved. They've seen it all.

Recruits, even those with family members who went through the process, are novices.

The reason there are so many early commitments is because college coaches put an enormous amount of pressure to commit, lest another player at your position accepts the scholarship that was earmarked for you.

Some suggest football should follow basketball's lead and go with two signing periods — one before the season and one after.

That is not the answer.

College coaching turnover seemed relatively mild this winter, but some years it's rampant. Even if recruits were let out of their letters in the event of a head-coaching change, I don't this as a solution.

Frankly, when it comes to decommitments, I'm not sure there is a problem. The college has all the power for the four or five years after a student-athlete signs on the dotted line.

Until then, a recruit should be entitled to change his mind as many times as he wants.

Yes, the system is broken, but it's because of how early the process is allowed to start. Every high school or college coach I have spoken to about this agrees.

I'd like to see all contact between college coaches and high school players banned until the end of their junior academic year.

College coaches wouldn't like this because they visit schools to size up juniors in the spring, but I'm certain this would not create a lack of exposure for anybody.

There are too many camps, clinics, combines and websites for that. If anything, it would provide more overall exposure, because if the process slowed down, late-blooming seniors would have a chance.